Category Archives: media

Obama imposter in White House, Obama hides records with taxpayer dollars, Media protects Obama, Sheriff Arpaio investigation proceeds, Forbes scrubbed article

Obama imposter in White House, Obama hides records with taxpayer dollars, Media protects Obama, Sheriff Arpaio investigation proceeds, Forbes scrubbed article

“As soon as all the corrections which happened to be necessary in any particular number of the Times had been assembled and collated, that number would be reprinted, the original copy destroyed, and the corrected copy placed on the files in it’s stead. This process of continuation alteration was applied not only to newspapers, but to books, periodicals, pamphlets, posters, leaflets, films, sound tracks, cartoons, photographs–to every kind of literature or documentation which might conceivably hold any political or ideological significance. Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date. In this way every prediction made by the Party could be shown by documentary evidence to be correct; nor was any item of news, or expression of opinion, which conflicted with the needs of the moment, ever allowed to be on record.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.”… William Tecumseh Sherman

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed –if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

Today is February 15, 2013.

We still have no proof that Obama was US born.

We still have not seen a birth certificate for Obama that would be accepted as court evidence proof of birth location.

We still have not seen Obama’s college records, passport records etc.

The Sheriff Joe Arpaio investigation of Obama’s records is proceeding.

The media continues to protect Obama and assist him with his Orwellian lies.

A prominent example from Citizen Wells March 26, 2012.

“Why did Forbes present the following article on March 24, 2012 and then scrub it within 2 days?

From Google cache:

TRATEGIES
 |
 3/24/2012 @ 11:40AM |13,232 views

Is There An Imposter In The White House? An Excerpt from “Hope Is Not A Strategy”

John MariottiJohn Mariotti, Contributor
Cover of "The Manchurian Candidate"Cover of The Manchurian Candidate

There is something very wrong when the sitting president refuses to divulge huge pieces of information about his background. What is he hiding? Maybe the “birthers” were a little extreme, but is there something wrong with this “manufactured candidate,” whose history remains sealed from public view? What is he hiding?

Could the “Hawaii birth certificate” be a forgery? Is there something much worse—like “sponsorship” by an unnamed special interest? I don’t know. I do know that the man in the White House now is an imposter. The only question is which kind of an imposter: an incompetent “pretender” or a genuine phony, a “Manchurian candidate,” who is a liberal, ½ black and ½ white, and an obvious Muslim sympathizer (despite claims of being a Christian—in clear conflict with his non-Christian behavior).

Will this campaign expose him as the imposter, and the pretender his behavior has revealed? Will it expose his hidden history and murky background. We know about his failures and mistakes.

For those who don’t, here is another in this series of revealing excerpts fromHOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency. The book is now available on www.amazon.com in paperback and Kindle versions. Other in e-book versions are available atwww.smashwords.com.

Excerpt from the chapter: Beware the Pretender:
…”No matter how many times President Obama refers to the “problems he inherited,” he has now been in office three years. Certainly many of the current problems can be traced back to events that happened during the eight years that Bush held the top office, and some can be traced back to even earlier presidencies—but far from all of them.
Many of the problems are newly created (or made worse), and Barack Obama owns them. Candidate Obama stepped up and essentially said, “I want the job, and everything that comes with it” by running for president. After three years in office, the problems now belong to him and his presidency. He caused them, made them worse, or didn’t solve them. Either way, they are his now.
…In leadership, you cannot “pretend” to be a leader. You either are—or you aren’t—a leader. One or the other will become apparent very quickly.
If you want the leadership job, you must step up and take full ownership of it. A “pretender” or “poser” is like an actor who has learned all the right lines, but has no idea what they mean. Once the script has been followed (or deviated from), the actor is clueless about what to do next. This is the job of the leader. Unfortunately, in this government, the “directors” often seem clueless, having learned in academia where results and wins/losses are theoretical, or in politics where success (at getting elected) is more a matter of rhetoric than results.
If you are not ready for a position, or do not believe that you have what it takes to rise to the challenge (or clean up the mess even if you believe it is not your mess), then do not take the job. This was Barack Obama’s fundamental mistake. He grossly underestimated the difficulty of the position he was running for, and overestimated his preparedness to actually do the job. Just because he could “talk a good game” (thanks to a phalanx of speech writers and the omnipresent teleprompters) does not mean he actually knew what to do or how to do it. The presidency of the United States of America is not a place for heavy OJT (On-the Job-Training)….”

After the first three plus years of the presidency, it is painfully clear that Barack Obama was a “pretty face,” and “glib speaker” and a lightweight liberal politician with a community organizer/radical background. The American people should be outraged at this man’s behavior and even his candidacy. Why are they not? Because of the misinformation delivered by sympathetic liberal/mainstream media who loves his nonsensical form of governing.

…”Obama’s perceived preparedness for the presidency is a terrible delusion, from which it is difficult to escape. Mistakes build upon each other and result in even more complex problems. Difficult problems that are mishandled become even more difficult to fix. When you have too little experience, lack substance (other than the words of your latest speech), then leading, managing and problem solving simply don’t happen. And that is what has occurred. When you compound the problem by surrounding your self with like-minded theorists, lacking in real-world experience, things become worse yet. The theoretical solutions to problems often don’t work due to the messiness of the real world—and the reasons are almost unfathomable to these rookie executive/politicians. …”

What should Americans think about this “imposter?” Will he divulge his true background so we can all see who he is and where he came from—really? If not, is this just a man who should never have been sworn into the office of President in the first place, and who has crippled Americans miserably during his term?

Will we continue to believe his misstatements (the politically correct term for lies)? Can he simply use the media to “erase and forget the past three years of misery and missteps?” Or will we learn from his imperialistic behavior and terrible results and throw him out in November?

That is what why we wrote HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency. To learn more go to:www.hopeisnotastrategybook.com and sign up—and go to www.amazon.comand buy the book—and see for yourself! There are thirty chapters that reveal what was behind Barack Obama’s mistakes, failures and lack of leadership.

—–
John Mariotti is an internationally known executive and an award-winning author. His newest book, co-authored with D. M. Lukas, Hope is NOT a Strategy: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency is at www.amazon.com, and other leading on-line booksellers.

Mariotti’s 2008 book, The Complexity Crisis was named one of 2008’s Best Business Books. His critically acclaimed 2010 novel, The Chinese Conspiracy, merges an exciting fictional thriller with the reality of America’s risk from Cyber-Attacks. Mariotti does keynote speeches, serves on corporate boards and is a consultant/advisor to companies. He can be reached at www.mariotti.net .

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:T_YAGFpnWM8J:www.forbes.com/sites/prospernow/2012/0324/is-there-an-imposter-in-the-white-house-an-excerpt-from-hope-is-not-a-strategy/+&cd=1&hl=en%E2%88%93ct=clnk&gl=us

We have further confirmation of the article from Forbes website:

March 24, 2012
  There is something very wrong when the sitting president refuses to divulge huge pieces of information about his background. What is he hiding? Maybe the”birthers” were a little extreme, but is there something wrong with this “manufactured candidate,” whose history remains sealed from public view? Whatis he hiding? Could the ”Hawaii birth […]
A click on the link yields the following:

Something’s gone awry! The page you requested could not be foundMany of our URLs have changed during our latest redesign.

  • If you got here by typing a URL, please make sure the spelling, capitalization, and punctuation are correct, then try loading the URL again.
  • If you got here by clicking a link on a Forbes.com page, please send us an email telling us how you reached this page.
  • You may have to update your bookmarks to the new URLs. Hopefully you can find what you need in the sitemap below.
Why did Forbes remove the article?
Were they threatened by Obama thugs?
Regardless of the reason, for scrubbing an article that is critical of Obama, Forbes is awarded 5 Orwells.

Thanks to many commenters for assistance in gathering data.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/forbes-scrubs-obama-critical-article-is-there-an-imposter-in-the-white-house-an-excerpt-from-hope-is-not-a-strategy-forbes-receives-5-orwells/

Obama Hillary Clinton revealed, February 3, 2013, Truth in print in NC, Clinton testimony exposed, Obama stupid gun comment, Rhino Times Obama administration truth

Obama Hillary Clinton revealed, February 3, 2013, Truth in print in NC, Clinton testimony exposed, Obama stupid gun comment, Rhino Times Obama administration truth

“But Crowley and Obama had it wrong. the Post’s Glenn Kessler explained:

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,” he said.
But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.”…Washington Post Oct. 17, 2012

“The question that I had in my mind, was why did we not do something to protect our forces?”…Charles Woods, father of slain Navy Seal

“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”…Barack Obama

 

 

Yesterday it was reported here that Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway had just bought the Greensboro News Record. The impact of that transaction may have already resulted in biased wording. This will be watched closely and counteracted to the extent possible.

This makes the role of the Rhinoceros Times, also based in Greensboro, NC, even more important. It too is in print and on the internet.

From the Rhino Times January 31, 2013.

The senators who finally got Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to testify had a lot of fun speechifying instead of asking questions. Sen. Rand Paul made his point that Hillary Clinton should have been fired, but why didn’t any senator ask her the question that should have been at the top of the list — why didn’t she know what happened in Benghazi, if not while it was going on, shortly after?

The ambassador and three other State Department employees were killed, but most of the State Department employees who were there were still alive on Sept. 12 and are alive today. Does Hillary Clinton not know how to use a telephone? Why didn’t she simply call one of the survivors and ask what happened.

If she had she would have known that it was not a spontaneous attack caused by a video or by people out walking around who decided they wanted to kill Americans. Hillary Clinton may not know that few people bring mortars and heavy machine guns to spontaneous rallies or take them on walks, even in the Middle East, but if she had simply talked to some of the survivors she would have known that it was not a spontaneous demonstration.

Rand was right that Hillary Clinton should have been fired for dereliction of duty for not reading the emails from her ambassador in Libya, but what was worse is that, according to what Clinton said, she took no action to find out what did happen at the US compound in Benghazi and at the CIA compund where the ex-Navy Seals were killed.

For what possible reason did it take weeks for the US government to find out what happened? Why wasn’t the compound sealed off? Why did it take weeks for the State Department to send the FBI to the scene to investigate?”

, , ,
“A statement thet rivals Hillary Clintons in outrageousness is Obama’s statement about gun control legislation: “If it saves only one life, it is worth it.” That is so stupid it is hard to believe that Obama’s speech writers allowed him to utter that phrase.

Lowering the national speed limit to 45 mph would save thousands of lives. Putting a trauma center in every little town in this country and in every neighborhood in cities would likewise save thousands of lives. One of the major causes of death in homes is falls, particularly in the bathroom. Ladders and bathtubs have no constitutional protection. So if Obama outlawed ladders and bathtubs thousands of lives could be saved.”

I would provide a link to this article, but I could find none.

US stated unemployment rate 7.9 percent, Labor force participation rate 63.6 percent, NC unemployment rate up, Berkshire Hathaway buys Greensboro News Record

US stated unemployment rate 7.9 percent, Labor force participation rate 63.6 percent, NC unemployment rate up, Berkshire Hathaway buys Greensboro News Record

“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012

“Guilford (Large NC County) appears on it’s way to a third consecutive year with annual jobless rates in double digits. Economists say that likely hasn’t happened since the Great Depression.”…Greensboro News Record December 2, 2011

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George Orwell, “1984”

 

From the US Labor Dept. February 1, 2013.

“Employment Situation Summary”

“Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 157,000 in January, and the unemployment rate was essentially unchanged at 7.9 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Retail trade, construction, health care, and wholesale trade added jobs over the month.

Household Survey Data

The number of unemployed persons, at 12.3 million, was little changed in January. The unemployment rate was 7.9 percent and has been at or near that level since September 2012. (See table A-1.) (See the note and tables B and C for information about annual population adjustments to the household survey estimates.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (7.3 percent), adult women (7.3 percent), teenagers (23.4 percent), whites (7.0 percent), blacks (13.8 percent), and Hispanics (9.7 percent) showed little or no change in January. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.5 percent (not seasonally adjusted), little changed from a year earlier.
(See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

In January, the number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was about unchanged at 4.7 million and accounted for 38.1 percent of the unemployed. (See table A-12.)

Both the employment-population ratio (58.6 percent) and the civilian labor force participation rate (63.6 percent) were unchanged in January.”

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

The Orwellian reporting of Obama and economic news is getting worse with no end in sight.

The Greensboro News Record has done a decent job of economic and jobs reporting over the past year.

However,

Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway just bought the Greensboro News Record.

“But Kroeger said BH Media likes the News & Record because it is the dominant source of information for the region, and that gives it an edge in attracting advertisers.

Kroeger said it’s important that the print newspaper is affordable and accessible to all readers, even in an economically troubled region.

But plenty of readers want their news by computer, smartphone and iPad. So, BH Media wants to deliver content to those people and earn money in the process.”

http://www.news-record.com/home/latestnews/673320-91/buffett-media-buys-news-

From the Greensboro News Record  January 30, 2013 .

“Update: Jobless rate up slightly in Triad”

“The jobless rate for the Greensboro-High Point metro area was 9.6 percent in December, up from November’s figure of 9.2 percent.

The December rate was lower compared with December 2011, which had a jobless rate of 10.5 percent, according to figures the N.C. Department of Commerce released today.”

http://www.news-record.com/news/business/665883-92/update-jobless-rate-up-slightly

“up slightly”

Is that like slightly pregnant?

Actually, unemployment was up in 97 of 100 counties in NC!

From the Greensboro News Record  February 1, 2013 .

“Greensboro area jobless rate drops, still high”

“No economist likes a 9.6 percent unemployment rate.

But December’s rate in the Greensboro/High Point Metro Area is nearly 1 percentage point lower than it was in December 2011, according to figures released Wednesday by the state Department of Commerce.

“That’s a terrible number, but it’s less terrible than a year ago,” said Andrew Brod, senior research fellow at the Center for Business and Economic Research at UNCG.”

http://www.news-record.com/news/crime/latestnewsnewscrime/666278-92/greensboro-area-jobless-rate-drops

“:jobless rate drops”

How many people read that and believed that it was reality?

Factor in the drop in the labor force participation rate in NC and it may not have dropped from a year ago.

George Orwell must be spinning in his grave.

Obama the spoiled child elected by adolescents, Real loser Adulthood Maturity Responsibility, Lack of reason and accountability cause liberals to blame guns and conservatives

Obama the spoiled child elected by adolescents, Real loser Adulthood Maturity Responsibility, Lack of reason and accountability cause liberals to blame guns and conservatives

“How do you get a Obama Liberal? You begin with a normal child at birth and take away reason and accountability.”…Citizen Wells

“The real loser in this election was adulthood: Maturity. Responsibility. The understanding that liberty must be accompanied by self-restraint. Obama is a spoiled child, and the behavior and language of his followers and their advertisements throughout the campaign makes it clear how many of them are, as well. Romney is a grown-up. Romney should have won. Those of us who expected him to win assumed that voters would act like grownups. Because if we were a nation of grownups, he would have won.

But what did win? Sex. Drugs. Bad language. Bad manners. Vulgarity. Lies. Cheating. Name-calling. Finger-pointing. Blaming. And irresponsible spending.”…Laura Hollis, attorney and associate professor of law at Notre Dame

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good”…George Washington

One of my favorite movies is “As Good as it Gets.” Jack Nicholson plays a obsessive compulsive misanthrope who is transformed into a more loveable character by the end. There are 2 scenes in the movie that are significant in regard to the liberal position on gun control.

The first is when Nicholson’s gay neighbor is beaten to near death when he is robbed. In real life, he would probably have been shot or knifed to death. However, there were enough blunt instruments around to do the job. The neighbor was outnumbered. If the neighbor had been armed (of course NY City has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation for the honest citizens) he could have repelled the intruders.

The second scene has one of the all time great movie quotes. Nicholson is actually describing how he writes about women. He states.

“It’s easy. I start with a man and I take away reason and accountability.”

I believe that the quote more accurately applies to liberals, many of whom are female.

Which leads me to the following.

Obviously, for the folks reading this with reason and accountability, guns are not responsible for the deaths at the Sand Hook Elementary School or anywhere else. In the world where reason and accountability should rule, here are the guilty parties.

I do not know how much involvement the dad had in his life. It is clear that the father’s role is important, but since I do not have that information I will not lapse into conjecture.

Here is the list in priority order:

1. Adam Lanza, the apparent shooter. Despite any mental illness or adversity, he is to blame.

2. Mother. She apparently knew of her son’s problems. She should have secured the guns.

3. Sandy Hook Elementary School and the school system. It was their job to protect the students. They failed with honorable mention to the staff members who gave their lives in an effort to protect the students. However, too little, too late.

4. The damn fools who have dictated that schools should be gun free zones.

5. The whole of American society that has let Liberals & wackos take over government, schools, media, etc.

Laura Hollis is an attorney and associate professor of law at the University of Notre Dame.

From Town Hall November 8, 2012.

“I am already reading so many pundits and other talking heads analyzing the disaster that was this year’s elections. I am adding my own ten cents. Here goes:

1. We are outnumbered

We accurately foresaw the enthusiasm, the passion, the commitment, the determination, and the turnout. Married women, men, independents, Catholics, evangelicals – they all went for Romney in percentages as high or higher than the groups which voted for McCain in 2008. It wasn’t enough. What we saw in the election on Tuesday was a tipping point: we are now at a place where there are legitimately fewer Americans who desire a free republic with a free people than there are those who think the government should give them stuff. There are fewer of us who believe in the value of free exchange and free enterprise. There are fewer of us who do not wish to demonize successful people in order to justify taking from them. We are outnumbered. For the moment. It’s just that simple.

2. It wasn’t the candidate(s)
Some are already saying, “Romney was the wrong guy”; “He should have picked Marco Rubio to get Florida/Rob Portman to get Ohio/Chris Christie to get [someplace else].” With all due respect, these assessments are incorrect. Romney ran a strategic and well-organized campaign. Yes, he could have hit harder on Benghazi. But for those who would have loved that, there are those who would have found it distasteful. No matter what tactic you could point to that Romney could have done better, it would have been spun in a way that was detrimental to his chances. Romney would have been an excellent president, and Ryan was an inspired choice. No matter who we ran this year, they would have lost. See #1, above.

3. It’s the culture, stupid.
We have been trying to fight this battle every four years at the voting booth. It is long past time we admit that that is not where the battle really is. We abdicated control of the culture – starting back in the 1960s. And now our largest primary social institutions – education, the media, Hollywood (entertainment) have become really nothing more than an assembly line for cranking out reliable little Leftists. Furthermore, we have allowed the government to undermine the institutions that instill good character – marriage, the family, communities, schools, our churches. So, here we are, at least two full generations later – we are reaping what we have sown. It took nearly fifty years to get here; it will take another fifty years to get back. But it starts with the determination to reclaim education, the media, and the entertainment business. If we fail to do that, we can kiss every election goodbye from here on out. And much more.

4. America has become a nation of adolescents
The real loser in this election was adulthood: Maturity. Responsibility. The understanding that liberty must be accompanied by self-restraint. Obama is a spoiled child, and the behavior and language of his followers and their advertisements throughout the campaign makes it clear how many of them are, as well. Romney is a grown-up. Romney should have won. Those of us who expected him to win assumed that voters would act like grownups. Because if we were a nation of grownups, he would have won.

But what did win? Sex. Drugs. Bad language. Bad manners. Vulgarity. Lies. Cheating. Name-calling. Finger-pointing. Blaming. And irresponsible spending.

This does not bode well. People grow up one of two ways: either they choose to, or circumstances force them to. The warnings are all there, whether it is the looming economic disaster, or the inability of the government to respond to crises like Hurricane Sandy, or the growing strength and brazenness of our enemies. American voters stick their fingers in their ears and say, “Lalalalalala, I can’t hear you.”

It is unpleasant to think about the circumstances it will take to force Americans to grow up. It is even more unpleasant to think about Obama at the helm when those circumstances arrive.

5. Yes, there is apparently a Vagina Vote
It’s the subject matter of another column in its entirety to point out, one by one, all of the inconsistencies and hypocrisies of the Democrats this year. Suffice it to say that the only “war on women” was the one waged by the Obama campaign, which sexualized and objectified women, featuring them dressed up like vulvas at the Democrat National Convention, appealing to their “lady parts,” comparing voting to losing your virginity with Obama, trumpeting the thrills of destroying our children in the womb (and using our daughters in commercials to do so), and making Catholics pay for their birth control. For a significant number of women, this was appealing. It might call into question the wisdom of the Nineteenth Amendment, but for the fact that large numbers of women (largely married) used their “lady smarts” instead. Either way, Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton are rolling over in their graves.

6. It’s not about giving up on “social issues”
No Republican candidate should participate in a debate or go out on the stump without thorough debate prep and a complete set of talking points that they stick to. This should start with a good grounding in biology and a reluctance to purport to know the will of God. (Thank you, Todd and Richard.)

That said, we do not hold the values we do because they garner votes. We hold the values we do because we believe that they are time-tested principles without which a civilized, free and prosperous society is not possible. We defend the unborn because we understand that a society which views some lives as expendable is capable of viewing all lives as expendable. We defend family – mothers, fathers, marriage, children – because history makes it quite clear that societies without intact families quickly descend into anarchy and barbarism, and we have plenty of proof of that in our inner cities where marriage is infrequent and unwed motherhood approaches 80%. When Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, many thought that the abortion cause was lost. 40 years later, ultrasound technology has demonstrated the inevitable connection between science and morality. More Americans than ever define themselves as “pro-life.” What is tragic is that tens of millions of children have lost their lives while Americans figure out what should have been obvious before.

There is no “giving up” on social issues. There is only the realization that we have to fight the battle on other fronts. The truth will out in the end.

7. Obama does not have a mandate. And he does not need one.
I have to laugh – bitterly – when I read conservative pundits trying to assure us that Obama “has to know” that he does not have a mandate, and so he will have to govern from the middle. I don’t know what they’re smoking. Obama does not care that he does not have a mandate. He does not view himself as being elected (much less re-elected) to represent individuals. He views himself as having been re-elected to complete the “fundamental transformation” of America, the basic structure of which he despises. Expect much more of the same – largely the complete disregard of the will of half the American public, his willingness to rule by executive order, and the utter inability of another divided Congress to rein him in. Stanley Kurtz has it all laid out here.

8. The CorruptMedia is the enemy

Too strong? I don’t think so. I have been watching the media try to throw elections since at least the early 1990s. In 2008 and again this year, we saw the media cravenly cover up for the incompetence and deceit of this President, while demonizing a good, honorable and decent man with lies and smears. This is on top of the daily barrage of insults that conservatives (and by that I mean the electorate, not the politicians) must endure at the hands of this arrogant bunch of elitist snobs. Bias is one thing. What we observed with Benghazi was professional malpractice and fraud. They need to go. Republicans, Libertarians and other conservatives need to be prepared to play hardball with the Pravda press from here on out. And while we are at it, to defend those journalists of whatever political stripe (Jake Tapper, Sharyl Atkisson, Eli Lake) who actually do their jobs. As well as FoxNews and talk radio. Because you can fully expect a re-elected Obama to try to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in term 2.

9. Small business and entrepreneurs will be hurt the worst
For all the blather about “Wall Street versus Main Street,” Obama’s statist agenda will unquestionably benefit the biggest corporations which – as with the public sector unions – are in the best position to make campaign donations, hire lobbyists, and get special exemptions carved out from Obama’s health care laws, his environmental regulations, his labor laws. It will be the small business, the entrepreneur, and the first-time innovators who will be crushed by their inability to compete on a level playing field.

10. America is more polarized than ever; and this time it’s personal

I’ve been following politics for a long time, and it feels different this time. Not just for me. I’ve received messages from other conservatives who are saying the same thing: there is little to no tolerance left out there for those who are bringing this country to its knees – even when they have been our friends. It isn’t just about “my guy” versus “your guy.” It is my view of America versus your view of America – a crippled, hemorrhaging, debt-laden, weakened and dependent America that I want no part of and resent being foisted on me. I no longer have any patience for stupidity, blindness, or vulgarity, so with each dumb “tweet” or FB post by one of my happily lefty comrades, another one bites the dust, for me. Delete.

What does this portend for a divided Congress? I expect that Republicans will be demoralized and chastened for a short time. But I see them in a bad position. Americans in general want Congress to work together. But many do not want Obama’s policies, and so Republicans who support them will be toast. Good luck, guys.

11. It’s possible that America just has to hit rock bottom
I truly believe that most Americans who voted for Obama have no idea what they are in for. Most simply believe him when he says that all he really wants is for the rich to pay “a little bit more.” So reasonable! Who could argue with that except a greedy racist?

America is on a horrific bender. Has been for some time now. The warning signs of our fiscal profligacy and culture of lack of personal responsibility are everywhere – too many to mention. We need only look at other countries which have gone the route we are walking now to see what is in store.

For the past four years – but certainly within the past campaign season – we have tried to warn Americans. Too many refuse to listen, even when all of the events that have transpired during Obama’s presidency – unemployment, economic stagnation, skyrocketing prices, the depression of the dollar, the collapse of foreign policy, Benghazi, hopelessly inept responses to natural disasters – can be tied directly to Obama’s statist philosophies, and his decisions.

What that means, I fear, is that they will not see what is coming until the whole thing collapses. That is what makes me so sad today. I see the country I love headed toward its own “rock bottom,” and I cannot seem to reach those who are taking it there.”

http://townhall.com/columnists/laurahollis/2012/11/08/postmortem/page/full/

Connecticut shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Mainstream media lies and misinformation, Where is proof that Adam Lanza guilty, Killer wore mask and silent

Connecticut shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Mainstream media lies and misinformation, Where is proof that Adam Lanza guilty, Killer wore mask and silent

“I am convinced that if squirrels had opposable thumbs, that based on their superior intellect, they would be overqualified to be journalists in the mainstream media”…Citizen Wells

“If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world but I am sure we would be getting reports from hell before breakfast.”… William Tecumseh Sherman

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O’Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom, he wrote:

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

I received the following article from a retired military officer friend of mine.

I am neither saying yea or nay to the conclusions arrived at. I have no corroboration.

However, this article is just as, or more believable than the lies and misinformation that have been spewed by the mainstream media. The article also raises many good questions.

From Help Free The Earth December 16, 2012.

“Elementary School Shooting: Who, How, Why”

Adam’s family and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting is as much a work of fiction as the 1960’s Addams Family TV show.

Adam Lanza was an honors student living in a prosperous neighborhood in a small picturesque town in Connecticut with his mother.

Now, 20 year old Adam is suspected of shooting his mother in the face, then gunning down 20 children at a Newtown elementary school before taking his own life.

The fact that the killer was wearing a MASK raises BIG questions. Like the Batman movie theater shooter, the elementary school shooter was wearing a mask and couldn’t be identified during the shooting.

Witnesses say the masked gunman didn’t utter a word…so nobody heard the killer’s VOICE or saw his face. Sound familiar?

The professional killer (Black Op) may have been the same masked gunman and his accomplice that pulled off the Batman movie theater shooting in Colorado. Since that didn’t win enough support for changing the gun control laws, shooting 20 innocent kids ought to do the trick.

ADAM

Adam Lanza moved to “Conn” from Kingston, New Hampshire, with his parents and older brother Ryan. He enjoyed soccer, skateboarding and video games. He had no known criminal record or history and has been described by his family, friends and classmates as a “polite”, “bright”, “nice” guy. No one believed he was capable of committing such horror.

A former classmate told CNN affiliate WCBS that Lanza “was just a kid” — not a troublemaker, not anti-social, not suggesting in any way that he could erupt like this.

Adam Lanza belonged to a technology club at Newtown High School that held “LAN parties” – short for local area network – in which students would gather at a member’s home, hook up their computers into a small network and play games.

Gloria Milas, whose son Joshua was in the club with Adam, said that Adam’s mother, Nancy, hosted one of the parties. Joshua Milas, who graduated from Newtown High School in 2009, said Adam Lanza was generally a happy person but that he hadn’t seen him in a few years.

“We would hang out, and he was a good kid. He was smart,” Joshua Milas said. “He was probably one of the smartest kids I know. He was probably a genius.”

THE REAL “MASKED” CHILD KILLER

On December 14th, in the darkness before dawn, a professional hitman wearing 2 sets of black battle fatigues and 2 bullet proof vests was dropped off by his “Black Op” accomplice and gained entry to the home that Adam Lanza shared with his mother Nancy.

The hitman shot Nancy Lanza in the face and took Adam hostage at gunpoint. The gunman removed the extra set of army fatigues and the extra bullet proof vest that he was wearing and ordered Adam to put them on. The gunman then confiscated the weapons registered in Nancy’s name.

At approximately 9 AM, the gunman packed Nancy Lanza’s Glock, Sig Sauer 9mm handgun and her Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle into her car and forced Adam to drive the car to Sandy Hook Elementary School. The gunman’s accomplice followed them to the school in another car.

The gunman told Adam to park his mother’s car near a school window where he knew a new security system had just been installed (1). The gunman then handed Adam a black mask and ordered him to put it on. The gunman pulled another black mask over his own head, then took Adam at gunpoint over to the window and by-passed the new security system to gain entry to the school (2).

The gunman who knew the school layout, escorted Adam into an empty room where he shot him in the head.

Without a word, the masked gunman moved swiftly down the hall and slipped into a classroom filled with children. He shot and killed 20 children in rapid fire using Nancy Lanza’s two handguns. He also shot the principal, the school psychologist and 4 other adults. It was over in minutes.

In the midst of the screams and chaos, the shooter returned to the room where Adam Lanza lay dead, placed the two discharged handguns next to him, then made a dash for the waiting car driven by his accomplice. The pair sped away.

After receiving a 911 call, the dispatched police and SWAT team arrived ten minutes later. By that time, the gunman and his accomplice were long gone. The police found Adam Lanza with a bullet in his head laying next to the two firearms used in the shooting – Nancy’s Glock and Sig Sauer.

The police reported that the gunman  entered the school wearing all black, a mask and a bullet-proof vest while carrying Glock and Sig Sauer 9mm handgun. A third weapon, a Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle, was found in Nancy Lanza’s car.

THE MOTHER – NANCY LANZA

There is widely reported misinformation about Nancy Lanza’s connection to the elementary school. The false reports are now stuck in the public’s mind. The false reports claim that she was a teacher at the Sandy Hook Elementary School – specifically that it was her class that Adam Lanza massacred. These are factual errors according to the Journal

“A former school board official in Newtown called into question earlier reports that Nancy Lanza had been connected to Sandy Hook Elementary School, possibly as part of the teaching staff. “No one has heard of her,” said Lillian Bittman, who served on the local school board until 2011. “Teachers don’t know her.”

Neighbor Gina McDade also confirmed that Nancy Lanza was a “stay-at-home mom” and not a teacher or part-time employee of Sandy Hook Elementary, as some media reports stated.

Nancy Lanza had earlier worked in finance in Boston and Connecticut, said a friend who knew her well but who didn’t want her name published. Nancy Lanza had retired or was on a break from her career, but she was not a teacher, the friend said.

This raises the obvious question: Since Adam’s wealthy mother Nancy had no connection to the school and was far too well-off to be working there, what possible motive could the 20 year old have had for slaughtering 20 elementary school kids????

Adam and his mother, Nancy, lived in a secluded well-to-do part of Newtown, a prosperous community of 27,000 people about 60 miles northeast of New York City. Nancy Lanza divorced her husband Peter in 2009 when Adam was 17. Aunt Marsha Lanza said the divorce left Nancy well off and that Nancy purchased guns because she was living alone in a big house.

Aunt Marsha described Nancy Lanza as a good mother and kind-hearted. She said that her nephew, Adam, was raised by kind, nurturing parents who would not have hesitated to seek mental help for him if he had needed it. Former classmates said that Adam had attended the local high school in Newtown at least through part of the 10th grade. According to Aunt Marsha, Nancy had home-schooled Adam after pulling him out of the Newtown public school system.

THE FATHER – PETER LANZA

Peter Lanza, who drove to northern New Jersey to talk to police and the FBI, is a highly paid vice president and tax accounting director at (General Electric) GE Capital. He had been a partner at global accounting giant Ernst & Young.

Peter married Nancy Lanza in New Hampshire in 1981, and had two sons, Adam and his older brother Ryan, who is now 24.

The Lanzas divorced in 2009 after 28 years of marriage due to “irreconcilable differences.” Peter Lanza now lives in Stamford, Connecticut with his second wife.

THE BROTHER – RYAN LANZA

Adam’s older brother Ryan Lanza, 24, has worked at Ernst & Young for four years, apparently following in his father’s footsteps and carving out a solid niche in the tax practice. He too was interviewed by the FBI. Neither he nor his father is under any suspicion.

“Ryan is a tax guy and he is clean as a whistle,” a source familiar with his work said.

Police had initially identified Ryan as the killer. Ryan sent out a series of Facebook posts saying it wasn’t him and that he was at work all day. Video records as well as card swipes at Ernst & Young verified his statement that he had been at the office.

Two federal sources told ABC News that identification belonging to Ryan Lanza was found at the scene of the mass shooting. They say that identification may have led to the confusion by authorities during the first hours after the shooting.

THE MOTIVE

No crime is ever committed without a motive. What was Adam’s motive?

What do we know about the elementary school child killer? He was masked. That means he couldn’t be identified during the shooting. The killer was a sharp-shooter who didn’t miss. Was Adam Lanza a sharp-shooter? Was Adam the kind of consciencless monster who could walk into an elementary school and kill 20 innocent kids in cold blood? Was there any evidence that Adam was that kind of monster?

What kind of a monster would do such a thing and why? Only a highly paid, professionally trained killer would commit such a heinous act. Who would pay a professional killer to kill 20 innocent children and why? The motive for this slaughter is the same motive for all of the other fictitious “lone gunmen” stories.

The motive is to win the public’s permission to strike down the second Ammendment of the American constitution and leave the public defenseless. “

Read more:

http://www.helpfreetheearth.com/news677_lanza.html

California data skewed Labor Dept. unemployment claims report, CA data reveals real unemployment rate, Labor force participation rate 62.4 % dropped more than unemployment rate since Feb 2012

California data skewed Labor Dept. unemployment claims report, CA data reveals real unemployment rate, Labor force participation rate 62.4 % dropped more than unemployment rate since Feb 2012

“With a 63.7% labor force participation, “conditions in the labor market are considerably worse than indicated” in July’s report”…economist Joshua Shapiro, WSJ August 3, 2012

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O’Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom, he wrote:

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”…Jesus, John 8:32

California has the third highest unemployment rate in the country at 10.2 percent. CA has been getting a lot of press recently for suspicious reporting the prior week that skewed the US Labor Dept. unemployment claims report. What you are probably not getting from the media is the fact that since February 2012, the labor force participation rate has dropped more than the unemployment rate.

First the reporting controversy.

From the Daily Pen October 19, 2012.

“Based on the increase of the denominator in the ratio, the analysts focused on California as the possible state which they believed had been left out because California has the largest population and largest labor force in the U.S. which, if omitted, would indeed cause about a 0.5% fluctuation based on previous report numbers.
In reaction to accusations of impropriety, the California Employment Development Department strongly denied that it had failed to properly document the data.
“Reports that California failed to fully report data to the U.S. Department of Labor, as required, are incorrect and irresponsible,” California Employment Development Department director Pam Harris said in a statement last week.
“The California Employment Development Department, which administers the Unemployment Insurance (UI) program in the state, has reported all UI claims data and submitted the data on time.”
However, it now appears the analysts were right.  Early Thursday, the federal government finally revealed that California was indeed the state that had, in fact, underreported jobless claims, as suspected by many, after the weekly Labor Department job report, skewing the national jobless claims results. This week’s updated jobs report corrected the error and showed unemployment claims spiking back up by 46,000.
The intentional omission of California’s data promoted an artificially favorable economic report for the Obama administration because the inclusion of California’s unemployed would have cause the jobless rate to increase by 0.02%, not decrease by 0.48% to 7.8%.
Regardless, the pro-Obama, biased media spread the “good news” quickly, with outlets like CNN and Bloomberg declaring, “Jobless claims fall to four-year low.”
Within hours, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Labor Department analysts announced that one major state had failed to fully document jobless claims. They declined to name the state.
Now, it has been learned that Marty Morgenstern, the secretary of the California municipal agency that under-reported unemployment claims, contributed to President Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential election campaign.
According to campaign disclosure records, Morgenstern donated $4,600 — the maximum amount allowed by law — to the 2008 Obama campaign, beginning with a $1,000 contribution to Obama for America in February 2008. Morgenstern followed up that donation with a $1,300 contribution in June, and then a $2,300 payout in early September.
Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown appointed Morgenstern to lead the California Labor & Workforce Development Agency in 2011. The state agency oversees the Employment Development Department.
California recent in-state report claims its unemployment rate has dropped from 10.6% to 10.2%.
Analysts are rightly skeptical of the report. “

http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2012/10/hawaii-health-department-not-only.html

From the Wall Street Journal October 18, 2012.

“So this week’s initial jobless claims spiked back up, jumping 46,000 to 388,000, a stark reversal from last week’s report and a number that suggests the economy still just flat-out isn’t generating enough jobs.
But more importantly, well, yes, we’re going back to Cali.
When last week’s numbers came out much lower than expected, the explanation from the Labor Dept. was that one large state didn’t report all the quarterly data on time. In the midst of a contentious election season, the issue sparked a minor firestorm and people jumped in trying to figure which state was responsible.
More than one said it was California. California, in no uncertain terms, said it wasn’t them. The Labor Dept. said, last week, that this week’s figures would make it clear which state was responsible. Guess which state the numbers point to.
As Sarah Portlock explained:
There were nearly 5,000 fewer layoffs in the service and retail industries in California for the week ended Oct. 6, according to the Labor Department report.
The Labor Department sets seasonal factors well in advance based on historical trends but that can skew numbers when state-level reporting doesn’t match those established patterns.
“These types of things happen several times a year,” a Labor Department official said Thursday. “It tends to be temporary.”
California maintain today that it did indeed report all data to the Labor Dept. on time, and that the seasonal adjustment was the cause of the skew. The Labor Dept. is saying that last week’s skew was due to a lower-than-expected number of claims from California. It’s possible that this all becomes nothing more than a lot of hair-splitting, elevated to a degree that it wouldn’t be if it weren’t election season, and if that September jobs report hadn’t stirred the wrath of Jack Welch.
The problem with seasonal adjustment is that it aims to correct data that move around in regular patterns. In this case, there’s usually a jump in claims in the first week of the quarter, so the adjustment takes away a bunch of claims. To keep the data smooth, those claims are added earlier in the prior quarter instead. Last week when some of the claims that would usually be filed in the first week of the month didn’t come in, the seasonals still kicked in and made it look like a big drop. The extra claims came in this week instead when the adjustment wasn’t expecting them. That made this week’s claims number look higher.
California’s numbers last week, late or not, skewed the seasonally adjusted data. The skew is gone this week. Bang. Go smell the flowers and forget all this whole imbroglio.
The season factors this month seem to be wreaking more havoc than usual,  so if you want a bottom line to all this nuttiness, look at the four-week moving average of claims. That rose to 365,500, from 354,750. Or you could just look at the unadjusted data, and rid yourself of all the seasonal adjustments that are causing all this agita. Unadjusted, initial claims were up 29,000 to 359,000.
The real bottom line is the U.S. economy isn’t generating enough jobs to get it back on a self-sustaining footing, which means the feds and the Fed are going to remain under pressure to pick up the slack.”
Politicians and the media lie, numbers don’t.
The following data is taken from the California Labor Market Review for September 2012.
There is more than suspect reporting in initial unemployment claims from CA. On Page 7 we find the changes in unemployment rate and labor force participation rate from February to September 2012 under seasonally adjusted.
February 2012.

Unemployment rate 10.9 %    LF Participation rate 63.3 %.

September 2012.

Unemployment rate 10.2 %    LF Participation rate 62.4 %.

The Labor Force Participation Rate dropped more than the unemployment rate. 

So the following claim:

“The California unemployment rate was 10.2 percent in September, down 0.4
percentage point from August.”

is very misleading.

The following facts are also interesting.
“By race and ethnicity, the September 2012 unemployment rate for blacks was 18.1 percent, Hispanics 13.2 percent, and whites 10.5 percent.”

“By duration, the largest group of unemployed persons was those who had been unemployed 52 weeks or more (691,000 persons or 35.0 percent of all unemployed). The next largest group was those who had been unemployed 5 to 14 weeks (418,000 persons or 21.2 percent of all unemployed)”

“Persons not in the labor force increased by 45,000 (0.4 percent) in September to 10,745,000. Over the past year, the number of persons not in the labor force increased by 295,000 (2.8 percent).”

http://www.calmis.ca.gov/file/lfmonth/calmr.pdf

Obama fact checked in print in NC, October 18, 2012, Rhino Times, John Hammer prints truth about Obama, Economy Obamacare Libya attack debate, Obama lies

Obama fact checked in print in NC, October 18, 2012, Rhino Times, John Hammer prints truth about Obama, Economy Obamacare Libya attack debate, Obama lies

“if they want to build [coal plants], they can, but it will bankrupt them”…Barack Obama

“We tried our plan—and it worked. That’s the difference. That’s the choice in this election. That’s why I’m running for a second term.”…Barack Obama

“The function of the press is very high. It is almost Holy.
It ought to serve as a forum for the people, through which
the people may know freely what is going on. To misstate or
suppress the news is a breach of trust.”
…. Louis D. Brandeis

From John Hammer of the Rhino Times, in Greensboro, NC October 18, 2012.

“Another debate and another pounding of the economic policies of President Barack Hussein Obama by Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

Obama has a difficult task running for reelection with the economy in its current shape. Romney is relentless in pointing out that the economy grew slower this year than last year and grew slower last year than the year before, and that 23 million Americans are unemployed. When Romney says the real unemployment rate is 10.7 percent Obama doesn’t argue. When Romney says that Obama has piled up budget deficits of over $1 trillion year after year, Obama doesn’t argue.

Obama does say that his policies are going to work, but it’s hard to sell the idea that policies that haven’t worked for four years are suddenly going to start working in the fifth year or maybe the sixth year or the seventh year.

Romney talks a lot about Obamacare, but Obama doesn’t. He talks about bringing health care to every American, but he doesn’t dwell on Obamacare because polls show that most Americans are against it. It’s his signature piece but he has all but given up selling it to the American people.

When it comes to the contraception aspect of Obamacare, Obama is extremely misleading. Nobody is talking about not providing contraception services. The question is, who pays. According to Obamacare it has to be a free service. Why? Why is that free? Most medical care is not free even if you have insurance. What’s more, Obamacare will force the Catholic Church and other religious organizations to provide abortion services that they believe are morally wrong.

If Obamacare is not changed by the courts or by Congress, it is likely that Catholic hospitals, clinics, social service providers, universities, schools and other outreach programs will close. Perhaps Obama has been listening to his Catholic Vice President Joe Biden and not the Catholic bishops. But he might want to pay attention because if Catholic hospitals close in the major cities, there is going to be a health care disaster, and the Catholic bishops have made it abundantly clear that they are going to have no part in providing abortions.

Biden was entirely wrong in his answer about the situation with Obamacare and the Catholic Church, but then Biden has been told by at least one bishop that he is not a Catholic in good standing and should not participate in the sacraments.

, , ,

There are only two possibilities I can think of when it comes to the response by President Obama to the planned and well-executed terrorist attack on the American compound in Benghazi, Libya.

One is that when an American ambassador was killed in the line of duty for the first time since 1979, during the Carter administration, President Obama decided that in the midst of a presidential election he could not afford to admit that he had refused to give an American ambassador in one of the most dangerous places on earth adequate protection. So he lied to the American people about what happened and hoped that the truth wouldn’t come out until after Nov. 6.

The other is that the Obama administration is so incompetent that it borders on criminal. For two weeks the Obama administration – through its press secretary, Jay Carney, and the US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice – claimed that the attack was the result of a spontaneous demonstration over a video some nutcase in California made.

But the night of Sept. 11, when the attack was underway, Obama should have immediately known that an American embassy compound where the American ambassador was in residence was under attack by well-organized and well-armed terrorists. We have one of the most sophisticated communications systems in the world. If the president isn’t informed about a terrorist attack on a US embassy compound immediately, then what is the system used for? To make sure Obama doesn’t miss any basketball scores? When high-level State Department officials are being killed that is an emergency.

The State Department knew. The intelligence community knew. Obama made a big deal about watching the attack on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan live in the White House. It wasn’t exactly true that they were watching it live, but they were watching the video the night that it happened.

The American embassy compound in Benghazi had surveillance cameras. The Rhino Times office also has surveillance cameras. You can watch The Rhino Times surveillance cameras real time from a computer, tablet or smart phone anywhere you can hook up to the internet. I cannot believe that the surveillance cameras at the American compound in Benghazi were not hooked up to some communication device so that they could be watched by people in the State Department and intelligence community.

Even without the surveillance cameras, the US had competent people on the ground who, once they got away from immediate danger, reported to their superiors. In fact, according to the State Department timeline, a call about the attack went out immediately with frequent updates. The State Department knew as soon as the men in the compound knew that they were under attack by an organized force.

Vice President Biden says that he didn’t know, and that is entirely possible. Why would anyone bother to tell the vice president, even if he were a competent, honest, intelligent human being? The vice president isn’t going to be making any decisions. He is completely out of the loop as long as the president is alive. Biden may still believe that the attack was the result of a spontaneous demonstration or he may believe that it took place in the last century where he evidently spends a lot of his time.

But President Obama knew or should have known within minutes exactly what was happening in Benghazi. He should have received the reports from those on the ground and he should have been watching the action on the surveillance cameras. But the reports from those in the compound who escaped only to be attacked at the so-called safe house about a mile away should have been more than enough proof that this was a highly organized, well-planned attack.

So in this next debate Obama needs to explain to the American people what happened. Was there such a tremendous communications breakdown that he didn’t get word from Libya about what happened for two weeks? Did the State Department put the Benghazi terrorist attack report on a sailing ship to send it to the White House? How on earth could a report and surveillance video take two weeks to get to the White House?

Obama needs to explain. If the first day the White House had gotten the story wrong that could be attributed to an honest mistake, but in today’s world to claim that the White House didn’t get information from its embassy for two weeks is simply a lie or evidence of overwhelming incompetence.

, , ,

Liberals love this, and the moderator for the presidential debate, Candy Crawley, is certainly a card-carrying liberal, which is why she re-asked the incredibly stupid question about making AK-47s illegal in the United States. Romney answered the question correctly by saying that fully automatic weapons are already illegal in the US. They have been since 1934. It is possible to get a license to have one, but it is not easy or cheap.

One of the so-called fact checkers said Romney was wrong when he said that fully automatic weapons were illegal. Technically Romney was wrong. Most people would tell you that it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon without the proper permit, but the fact checkers evidently would tell you that is wrong because you can carry a concealed weapon on your own property without a permit. Technically there was no Vietnam War, but that is simply not how we speak. Technically only a couple of hundred people get to vote for president, but candidates and pundits talk about voters in the presidential race all the time. Nobody says “people who vote for electors committed to one candidate,” we call them voters.

However, what the question was about were “assault weapons,” which is a term invented during the Clinton administration. The AK-47 is not an assault weapon; it is an assault rifle because it is fully automatic and for all practical purposes illegal. The assault weapons ban was not about banning a particular kind of rifle but banning rifles because of the way they looked. Rifles that operate identically could be legal or illegal based on how they looked. One that looked like a hunting rifle would be legal and one that looked like an assault rifle would be illegal.

It was a law that simply made people who want all guns to be illegal happy, but didn’t really do anything. Now many hunters are using what are technically assault weapons for hunting. They are lightweight, accurate and make good hunting rifles. And it is true that they are used to kill people. But knives are also frequently used to kill people and there was no question for the candidates about making knives illegal.

, , ,

President Harry S. Truman, a Democrat who won the respect of both parties and whom history has smiled upon, had a plaque on his desk that read, “The Buck Stops here!”

President Obama, a Democrat who has not won the respect of Republicans and is losing the respect of many Democrats and whose place in history is unknown, has no such plaque, and up until Tuesday night did not follow the philosophy expressed on the plaque.

We know this because Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was sent out to take the fall for Benghazi. The buck stopped with the secretary of state, not the president. You have to wonder what Truman would say about such cowardice by an American president.

Obama takes full credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden although he was over 7,000 miles away. That was Obama who took Bin Laden out, not the Navy Seals who were onsite risking their lives and doing the shooting. But when an American ambassador gets killed in the line of duty for the first time since 1979, it was not Obama’s fault, but the fault of the secretary of state.

During the second presidential debate on Tuesday night, the story changed again. Evidently having Hillary Rodham Clinton take the fall for the terrorist attack in Benghazi was not working with the American people. So during the Tuesday night debate Wendy Crawley threw Obama a softball so he could take full responsibility for the failure.

The attack was on Sept. 11, and on Oct. 16 the president finally takes full responsibility. It does make you wonder how many months it would have taken for Obama to take full responsibility if it wasn’t an election year.

, , ,

The more we learn about Obama the more questions arise. According to his own personal history Barry Obama quit being Barry and became Barack when he was at Occidental College in Los Angeles. By the time he went to Columbia University he was going by Barack exclusively, even to the point, according to his sister, of trying to get his family to call him Barack. But Martha Raddatz reportedly invited Barry Obama to her wedding. So if everyone called him Barack and had no reason to even know that he was called Barry as a kid, why was Barry invited to the wedding.

Or did really close friends at Harvard call him Barry? We’ll never know.

, , ,

They call it the Stupid Party for a reason, and unfortunately the reason hasn’t gone away. Four years ago the moderator of the vice presidential debate, Gwen Ifill, had written a book about Obama. If he were elected her book would make money, if he lost then the book would go in the remainder bin. She had a lot of money riding on the outcome of the debate and the election.

But then the Republicans allow that snafu to be topped. Barry Obama went to Martha Raddatz’s wedding and she was invited to the Obamas’ wedding but didn’t attend. However, her husband (now her ex) did. Do the Republicans vet these people at all? Do they have a list of Obama’s immediate family and if the person is not on that list, not named George Obama for instance, then they are eligible?

Then when you think it can’t get any worse they come up with this woman for the second town hall meeting, Candy Crawley, who gave Obama 9 percent more time than Romney and was much harder on Romney than on Obama. She also selected the questions, which were Obama-friendly, and asked her own follow-up questions, which she was not supposed to do according to the agreement signed by both campaigns.

This just in for the next and final debate, Obama’s campaign Communications Director David Axelrod is unexpectedly unavailable to moderate the debate so the Commission on Presidential Debates has asked Michelle Obama if she will step in. The Commission on Presidential Debates has noted that Mrs. Obama is a Harvard Law graduate like president Obama but did not attend Harvard Law School at the same time as President Obama, so they do not think she will have a conflict of interest based on their law school years.

The Republican Party has reportedly agreed to accept Michelle Obama as a fair and impartial moderator but has insisted that her daughters not be allowed to sit with her while she moderates the debate.

Who are these people on the Commission on Presidential Debates? Do they pick moderators from a list submitted by the Obama campaign? It’s like having the Ram’s Club pick the referees for the Duke-Carolina game. The Republicans have four years to get their act together but they had better get some conservative Republicans appointed to the Commission on Presidential Debates.”

http://greensboro.rhinotimes.com/Articles-Columns-c-2012-10-18-213522.112113-Under-The-Hammer.html

 

Rush Limbaugh declares Romney winner of debate, Facts not lies win presidential debates, Barack Obama and Candy Crowley lies being discussed

Rush Limbaugh declares Romney winner of debate, Facts not lies win presidential debates, Barack Obama and Candy Crowley lies being discussed

“It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”…Candy Crowley

“But Crowley and Obama had it wrong. the Post’s Glenn Kessler explained:

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,” he said.
But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.”…Washington Post Oct. 17, 2012

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

From Rush Limbaugh October 17, 2012.

RUSH:  I’m seriously amazed.  I really am, ladies and gentlemen, seriously amazed at the uniformity of thought and opinion across the spectrum on the debate last night.  I must tell you, in all honesty, my view of what happened last night is not even close to what I’m hearing on Fox News, on MSNBC, on CNN, in the New York Times and the Washington Post.  Well, actually, you know, some of the newspaper editorials are closer to the way I saw this last night than some of the people on television.

Let me start out by stating something patently obvious.  Maybe put it to you in the form of a question.  Addressing one of the things that I have detected that people on our side are most concerned about, outside of Candy Crowley, which we’ll deal with here in just a second.  Libya.  Romney had a big opening.  He didn’t close it.  He didn’t secure it.  He could have said, “What are you talking about, terror attack?  You blamed a video for two weeks.”  He didn’t say that.

Are any of you not going to vote for Mitt Romney because he didn’t have something to say at a crucial moment that you wanted him to say?  Is somebody gonna vote for Barack Obama that wasn’t going to because Mitt Romney didn’t say, “You were talking about a video for two weeks.”  No, of course not.  There weren’t any votes lost by Romney last night, and there weren’t any votes gained by Obama.  Seriously.  So the whole notion I’m hearing of scoring this thing on points, this isn’t a college debate where you lose for technique according to some scoring system.  This was an entirely different dynamic, and it’s one that Obama came nowhere near overcoming.  The problem that he had going in is not one that he got anywhere near solving.

My friends, I want you to know something here.  I’m not speaking with preferences guiding my comments, and I’m not speaking with hope or false promises.  I’m shooting you straight as best I can.  I watched this debate last night and I saw another halting, choppy, staccato-speaking Barack Obama, wandering aimlessly, speaking in theory, speaking in faculty lounge lizard theoretical non-reality.  I saw cliche after cliche.  I heard liberal cliche after cliche.

The first question was some college kid who wants to know about a job and Obama talks to him about manufacturing jobs?  This kid isn’t going to college to learn how to weld.  He’s not going to college to find a manufacturing job. And Obama answers his question that way?  Through most of this debate I was thinking, here’s Romney, Mr. Smooth, he is in total command of the facts.  He is once again totally decimating Obama’s economic performance.  Obama, in his closing remarks, was reduced to sounding like me, when everybody knows he doesn’t believe a word of what he said.  He doesn’t believe in rugged individualism.  He doesn’t believe in self-reliance.  He doesn’t believe in any of those things.

Why doesn’t that matter when people start scoring these debates?  They look at these debates and they score some system that’s foreign to me.  Style points or any number of odd things that are irrelevant in a presidential campaign.  But I didn’t see Barack Obama dazzling anybody with a defense of his record.  I didn’t hear Barack Obama talk about his great plans for the future.  I heard Barack Obama even at one point say “when I was president” as though it’s in the past tense.  I saw a nervous, staccato speaking, choppy. In fact, everybody talks about how Romney got a raw deal from Candy Crowley, and he did, but it is what it is.

There was a point in that debate last night — Kathryn and I are sitting there watching it — and I was so stunned by what I saw that I hit the pause on the DVR.  And I said, “Do you realize what we just saw here?”  And what it was was a full-fledged destruction of the Obama record by Mitt Romney.  Every stat you could want.  Household income falling, unemployment up, the number of people out of the workforce, the number of jobs lost since Obama took office, the number of people totally out of work, 23 million.  Every economic statistic that detailed the crumbling aspects of this regime.  And Candy Crowley — on second thought, maybe she did him a favor — did not let Obama respond.  She didn’t make Romney stop prematurely, he finished, and then she went on to the next question.

Now that I think about it now, and now that we know what we know, there’s no question she was trying to save Obama by making sure he didn’t have to deal with that.  But the bottom line is, for everybody who thinks that Romney had a minor screw up here because he didn’t point out that Obama had been saying it’s a video for two weeks, Obama did not have a syllable to say in refutation, in disagreement with Romney’s sterling recitation of his failures.  There wasn’t one retort. There wasn’t one reply to it. There wasn’t one accusation that Romney had said anything that wasn’t true.

In fact, today, the day after, the only people who are accused of saying things that are not true are Barack Obama and Candy Crowley, not Mitt Romney.  I kid you not.  That’s the debate I saw.  I once again saw an Obama who looked uncomfortable and unprepared and full of, “Eh, uh, eh, uh.”  I didn’t see Mr. Smooth. I didn’t see Mr. In Command of Facts. I didn’t see anybody who was eager to defend his performance and his record.  Folks, I’m gonna apologize to you because I simply do not have a recollection or an analysis of what I saw last night that is anywhere close to what I’ve seen — and I haven’t seen it all — to what I saw on television last night. ”

Read more:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/10/17/my_debate_analysis_defies_the_uniformity_of_thought_that_pervades_virtually_all_media

Obama wins hustle Romney wins debate, John Sununu trumps Queen of media bias and stupidity Soledad O’Brien, Facts not lies win debates and voters

Obama wins hustle Romney wins debate, John Sununu trumps Queen of media bias and stupidity Soledad O’Brien, Facts not lies win debates and voters

“It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”…Candy Crowley

“But Crowley and Obama had it wrong. the Post’s Glenn Kessler explained:

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,” he said.
But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.”…Washington Post Oct. 17, 2012

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. His heart sank as he thought of the enormous power arrayed against him, the ease with which any Party intellectual would overthrow him in debate, the subtle arguments which he would not be able to understand, much less answer. And yet he was in the right! They were wrong and he was right. The obvious, the silly, and the true had got to be defended. Truisms are true, hold on to that! The solid world exists, its laws do not change. Stones are hard, water is wet, objects unsupported fall towards the earth’s centre. With the feeling that he was speaking to O’Brien, and also that he was setting forth an important axiom, he wrote:

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984”

Rush Limbaugh today stated that he believed that Romney won the debate. I agree. Focus groups gauging the reaction of formerly undecided voters confirm the win as well.

Obama, as usual, won the lie contest. Obama the hustler.

From GOPUSA October 17, 2012.

“CNN Anchor Slammed Over Twisting of Obama Statement on Libya”

“Don’t mess with John Sununu… at least if you don’t come armed with the facts. That’s what CNN’s Soledad O’Brien found out when she tried to imply that Mitt Romney erred at Tuesday night’s debate when he called out Barack Obama over the attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

First, a review for those of you who missed the debate and have not followed the timeline regarding the murders in Libya and Obama’s public statements regarding them. Make no mistake… Barack Obama and his team purposely tried (and are still trying) to mislead the American people over the cause of the attack.

September 11, 2012 — Four Americans including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens were murdered in a terrorist attack at the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

The very next day, Obama gives a speech in the Rose Garden talking about the murders. The full transcript can be found here. The important passage as follows:

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.

When you look at the context of the full speech AND the exact words as presented here, it is clear that this is a GENERIC statement of American policy. Basically, acts of terror will not be condoned. Barack Obama did NOT say that the attacks in Libya were a terrorist act.

Here’s the video of the speech:

So… what happened next? September 11, 2012 was a Tuesday. On that Sunday, September 16, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice appeared on five talk shows and mentioned NOTHING about a terrorist attack. She said over and over again that it was a spontaneous uprising because of an anti-muslim Internet video.

Barack Obama was interviewed by Univision and asked if the attack was terrorism. He said he’d get back to them. He was asked on The View… same response. Obama also made a speech to the United Nations and NEVER mentioned that the murders were an act of terrorism. Oh… but he did mention the Internet video six times.

Why is all this important? Because during the debate, Obama made it sound as if he stated it was a terrorist attack the very next day:

Candy Crowley’s behavior here was not only unprofessional, it was wrong. She was wrong when she sided with Obama. As pointed out by Fox News, in a interview on CNN, Crowley admitted she was wrong:

The moderator in Tuesday night’s presidential debate, after appearing to side with President Obama on the question of whether he called the Libya strike a terror attack from the start, conceded afterward that Mitt Romney was “right” on the broader point — that the administration for days insisted it was a spontaneous act.

“He was right in the main. I just think he picked the wrong word,” Candy Crowley said of Romney on CNN shortly after the debate ended.

Crowley was referring to the tense exchange in the final half-hour of the debate, when Romney questioned whether Obama had called the attack an “act of terror” rather than “spontaneous” violence that grew out of a protest against an anti-Islam video.

So Romney was right. We all know he was right. For days and days, Barack Obama and his team perpetuated a lie. The murders were never about an Internet video. And yet, that’s what he kept saying. At the debate, he tried to step back from that storyline, and Romney would have hammered him on it if not interrupted by Crowley.

Those are the facts, and yet, people like Soledad O’Brien continue to spin for Obama. Watch John Sununu work his magic:

It’s unreal that O’Brien tries to label as fact something that does not exist. Obama did not say the Libyan murders were a terrorist act. Yet she goes on and on.

Even though the economy still is front and center on the minds of most Americans, this is a HUGE issue. Please inform people about it. Why would Obama perpetuate a story about a video knowing that it was untrue? What does he have to gain by that? To make it seem that is efforts against terrorism are working? Guess what? They aren’t!”

http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/2012/10/17/cnn-anchor-slammed-over-twisting-of-obama-statement-on-libya/?subscriber=1

For her Orwellian efforts to prop up Obama,  Soledad O’Brien and CNN are awarded 5 Orwells.

Candy Crowley bias aids Obama lies, Romney succeeds despite Crowley’s efforts to select questions fact check Libya terror statement and cut off Romney, Crowley awarded 5 Orwells

Candy Crowley bias aids Obama lies, Romney succeeds despite Crowley’s efforts to select questions fact check Libya terror statement and cut off Romney, Crowley awarded 5 Orwells

“It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”…Candy Crowley

“But Crowley and Obama had it wrong. the Post’s Glenn Kessler explained:

What did Obama say in the Rose Garden a day after the attack in Libya? ”No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this nation,” he said.
But he did not say “terrorism”—and it took the administration days to concede that that it an “act of terrorism” that appears unrelated to initial reports of anger at a video that defamed the prophet Muhammad.”…Washington Post Oct. 17, 2012

“the Times of the nineteenth of December had published the official forecasts of the output of various classes of consumption goods in the fourth quarter of 1983, which was also the sixth quarter of the Ninth Three-Year Plan. Today’s issue contained a statement of the actual output, from which it appeared that the forecasts were in every instance grossly wrong. Winston’s job was to rectify the original figures by making them agree with the later ones.”…George Orwell, “1984”

This is a teachable moment. Candy Crowley’s performance in the Obama Romney debate last night was predictable. She has a history of liberal slant, she is a member of the mainstream media and she works for CNN.

Are there enough intelligent, informed and concerned Americans left out there to discern the truth? Obama lied again and Candy Crowley helped him.

From the Washington Times October 17, 2012.

“Another debate, another debacle for America’s media.

In the runup to the second presidential debate, CNN’s Candy Crowley declared that she would not just be a “fly on the wall” as she played the tiny role of moderator, that she would step in whenever she chose to say, “Hey, wait a second, what about X, Y, Z?”

And boy did she, cutting off Republican Mitt Romney repeatedly and often throwing the floor to President Obama with an open “let me give the president a chance here.”

More, she alone decided the topics for the debate, picking questions from the 80 so-called “undecided” voters chosen by the Gallup polling organization. Her selections were tailor-made for Mr. Obama — Mitt Romney’s tax plan, women’s rights and contraception, outsourcing, immigration, the Libya debacle (which gave Mr. Obama to finally say that the buck stops with him, not, as Hillary Clinton said, with her).

She even chose this question, directed to both men: “I do attribute much of America’s economic and international problems to the failings and missteps of the Bush administration. Since both of you are Republicans, I fear the return to the policies of those years should you win this election. What is the biggest difference between you and George W. Bush, and how do you differentiate yourself from George W. Bush?”

Ms. Crowley, who called Mr. Romney’s selection of Rep. Paul Ryan as running mate a “ticket death wish,” asserted her unilateral power at the outset, telling the audience before the cameras went on that she planned to “give the debate direction and ensure the candidates give answers to the questions.”

After both candidates answered Question One, she blurted: “Let me get a more immediate answer” — whatever that means. But when Mr. Romney sought to correct falsehoods told by the president, she cut him off: “We have all these folks here.” In the end, Mr. Obama would get 9 percent more time.

At Question Two, Mr. Obama, asked by Mr. Romney how much he had cut federal oil permits, took over the floor — with Ms. Crowley’s silent approval. “Here’s what happened,” he said as he filibustered for a full minute. Mr. Romney sought to get the last word — as the president had the question before — but the moderator shut him down: “It’ doesn’t quite work like that.”

When Mr. Romney sought to counter Mr. Obama’s assertion after Question Three, Ms. Crowley again cut him off: “Before we get into a vast array….” she said before asking a completely different question.

The next question was pure Obama — workplace inequality (the president mention at every stop his Lily Ledbetter legislation). But the query gave him the platform to demand Americans pay for contraception for all women, saying the governor “feels comfortable having politicians in Washington decide the health care choices that women are making.”

For the record, Mr. Obama spoke for two minutes, then Mr. Romney, then Mr. Obama again. Ms. Crowley then rushed into the next question.

When the immigration question came up, both candidates gave their answers. Then the moderator once again butted in, ordering Mr. Romney to “speak to the idea of self-deportation.”

By then, Mr. Romney had had enough, and talked over her demands. “No, let — let — let me go back and speak to the points the president made and — and — and let’s get them correct.”

At the next question, the moderator lost all control. “Candy,” Mr. Obama said. “Hold on.” “Mr. President,” the governor said, “I’m still speaking.” They mixed it up for a bit, then Ms. Crowley said: “Sit down, Mr. Romney.”

The most shocking exchange took place on the Benghazi attack that left the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three others dead.

Mr. Romney: “You said in the Rose Garden the day after the attack, it was an act of terror? It was not a spontaneous demonstration, is that what you’re saying.”

Mr. Obama made no defense. “Please proceed, governor.”

“I want to make sure,” Mr. Romney said. “Get the transcript,” the president said. Then Ms. Crowley jumped in to do her own fact-check, on the spot. “It — it — it — he did in fact, sir. … He did call it an act of terror.”

The truth is, he didn’t. The day after the attack, he said only this: “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” It took another two weeks before the White House would label the attack an act of terror.

The Obama people, of course, loved it — having blamed Mr. Obama’s dismal performance in the first debate on poor moderating.

“He’s back,” said Team O spokeswoman Jen Psaki, who lauded Ms. Crowley for her fact checking.

But then she caught herself and quickly added: “He was never really gone, but he’s back.””

Read more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/17/curl-crowley-skews-hard-obama-disastrous-debate/?page=all#pagebreak

For her Orwellian efforts to prop up Obama, Candy Crowley is awarded 5 Orwells.